The NIH says funding cuts would save it billions of dollars a year. D.C.-area industry and academic leaders say it would cripple R&D.

The funding agency aims to cap “indirect costs” in biomedical research grants. But this behind-the-scenes work is crucial to making research happen.

Sweeping layoffs, funding freezes and executive orders have provoked outcry among federal researchers and their university partners, who fear that science itself is under siege.

Vanderbilt is one of several research universities nationally very concerned about cuts to NIH grant funding. We went inside on drug lab with a lead researcher to see exactly what is at stake.

The NIH projected the cut will save it $4 billion during the current federal fiscal year, which ends September 30. That’s nearly half of the $9 billion that the NIH said it set aside for overhead ...

Johns Hopkins psychiatrist Paul Nestadt says cutting NIH funding for suicide prevention research is 'not just a fiscal ...

The National Institutes of Health is not only the largest institution for biomedical science on earth, it is one of this ...

The Trump administration has capped indirect costs for National Institutes of Health research grants at 15%. That would wipe ...

Potential delays in clinical trials may result in extended timelines for new drug approvals, and a sudden reduction in ...

The state's life sciences industry, which generated $3.3 billion in economic activity in 2023, could be severely impacted by ...

The National Institutes of Health proposal would limit indirect costs for research projects to 15 percent of grants.

Here’s a look at what the Trump administration’s decision to cut overhead funding for biomedical research means for ...